1 |
On Mon, Feb 08, 2016 at 08:15:42PM -0500, Alex McWhirter wrote |
2 |
|
3 |
> As far as upstream support for eudev goes, consider that we are |
4 |
> currently breaking out udev for use with openrc. There may still be |
5 |
> loose support for this now, but when udev is not longer able to be |
6 |
> separated from systemd it's guaranteed that support for this kind of |
7 |
> configuration will be dropped. |
8 |
|
9 |
I think the whole point of eudev is that Anthony here, rather than |
10 |
Lennart at Redhat, is "upstream". Stop looking at the Redhat people as |
11 |
"upstream" for eudev. They're doing their best to break it. I don't |
12 |
know how many of you are old enough to remember the dirty tricks that |
13 |
Microsoft pulled when IBM was running Windows 3.1 inside OS/2. One |
14 |
minor tweak, and Windows 3.11 broke inside OS/2. Lennart and company |
15 |
are actively hostile to us, and Gentoo risks annihilation and/or |
16 |
absorption into the systemd Borg, if we consider the systemd people as |
17 |
our "udev upstream". |
18 |
|
19 |
eudev is an independant fork, and should stand on its own. I |
20 |
currently use Pale Moon web browser, which is an independant fork of |
21 |
Firefox. Look Ma, no Atrocious^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H Austraulis GUI. Because |
22 |
it's an independant fork, Firefox can shut down altogether, and Pale |
23 |
Moon will keep going. That's the model I want eudev to follow. |
24 |
|
25 |
> So with that being said, I'm all for making eudev default as the only |
26 |
> other option would be making systemd default which is a completely |
27 |
> different discussion. One or the other will likely have to happen at |
28 |
> some point. |
29 |
|
30 |
How difficult would it be to make it an install-time choice, like the |
31 |
bootloader? |
32 |
|
33 |
-- |
34 |
Walter Dnes <waltdnes@××××××××.org> |
35 |
I don't run "desktop environments"; I run useful applications |